STATE Vs. K. PRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents are Accused in S.C.No.71 of 2011 on the file the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu. The petitioner/State has come up with this original petition challenging the order dated 08.07.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge directing to issue summons to Shri.T.Rajendran, I.P.S., the then Commissioner of Police, Chennai City as a defence witness.

(2.) The facts of the case would be as follows:- One Shri.Ramesh (P.W.4) is a business man and a resident of Anna Nagar, Chennai. His son, Shri.Keerthivasan, during the year 2010 was studying in DAV School at Mogappair. On 01.11.2010, Shri.Keerthivasan had gone to school in a car. By about 03.30 p.m., P.W.4's driver - Shri.Govindarajan had gone to the school in the car belonging to P.W.4 to take the child. After the school time was over, Shri.Keerthivasan came out of the school and he was returning in the car. At some distance of the school, the car was intercepted by two persons brandishing knife. Shri.Govindarajan stopped the car. They forced into the car and directed Shri.Govindarajan to turn the car towards the road which branches of towards left. Then, they pushed Shri.Govindarajan out from the car and kidnapped the child along with the car. Shri.Govindarajan soon informed the same to P.W.4 over phone. Then, P.W.1 wanted Shri.Govindarajan to rush to Mogappair, J.J.Nagar Police Station. P.W.4 also rushed to the police station. At that time, he received a call from a cell phone informing him that the child was in the custody of the persons who spoke over mobile phone. The caller warned Shri.Govindarajan not to go to the police station and he warned that in the event P.W.4 had gone to police station they would kill the child. However, P.W.4 had managed to give a complaint upon which the present case in Crime No.112 of 2010 was registered for alleged offences under Sections 363, 365, 364(A), 386, 506(ii) IPC and 465, 468, 471, 114, 109 IPC r/w 465, 468, 471 IPC r/w 34 IPC.

(3.) I have heard the learned Public State Prosecutor for the petitioner / State and Mr.N.R.Elango, the learned senior counsel for the respondents / Accused and also perused the records carefully.